We should be allowed to purchase FA firearms without the extremely inflated prices due to the lack of available firearms. If the federal government were to mandate electric cars for everyone unless you have a car made before 2015, it would make pre-2015 petroleum powered vehicles price skyrocket and if you want to buy a pre-2015 petro vehicle you have to register and pay a $2k tax to the feds. That is essentially what happened with FA firearms. Removing the pre-1986 stipulation would be a good place to start, next I would like to see the states in control of laws for FA firearm ownership.
Pure awesome - Help Overturn 18 USC 922(o) and NFA
- Thread starter pangris1
- Start date
The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
This guy gets it. I don't really hear anyone complain about the cost of the tax stamp, and I think most would honestly be okay with the wait. It's the pre-1986 thing that sucks so hard. Open up the registers and let the public buy any machine gun as long as we Form 4 them. Who gives a crap what year it was manufactured? It's just a long-con to banning all MG's.
At a minimum this would go a long way to restoring our rights. Historically the $200 stamp was a really big deal (it basically doubled the cost of your tommy gun, plus the hassle of registration). $200 is no big deal today but you still have the hassle (which many of us are willing to put up with).
In about 22 years everything pre-1986 will be C&R and eventually will be considered antique and not even relevant to self-defense. It would be easier for the anti-2nd amendment guys on here to argue that the 2nd amendment only applied to arms when the bill of rights was written, and that we only have a right to flintlock muskets.
The pre1986 part is just a way for gun control activists to cause the supply to dry up or become so expensive that most citizens cannot afford them. If they would repeal that clause, the government would probably raise the tax stamp cost to $2500...
I will take the booze and guns. As for driving, even my father calls me "grampa." I will get to the party a little late though. In any case, I am responsible for my actions.
Last edited:
I can see that as being an unintended outcome of this entire operation. A raised tax stamp fee (especially over $1K) across the board would cut down on the number of transfers taking place.
JR1572
Last edited:
Yeah that would definitely be the agenda of several politicians, if it already isn't. Even though the anti-gun pressure is strong, NFA is pretty mainstream now and I think an amendment etc. to bump the fees would not go unnoticed by the pro-gun congressmen.
Honestly though I think it would still be worthwhile if it meant we could buy good stuff again.
- - - Updated - - -
Dock Rocker
Well-Known Member
The reason they have not raised the tax is only because it's actually written into the legislation. They would have to change the NFA in order to change the tax amount. I am sure they have tried to find a way around it.
Totally agree.. Selfish and greedy!
Then your investment would be worth less which would **** you off, but once you accept the losses then you will buy MG's at MSRP just like everyone else (who can legally purchase any firearm).
What about music? What if legislation dictates that you can only own vinyl records that were manufactured before 1968, all technology post vinyl is banned in response to piracy. Has the government been giving any records lately?
I wouldn't buy anymore even if y'all's dream came true. I already have the ones that I want.
JR1572
GunRelated
Well-Known Member
Then whats the problem? Oh, i get it now. As mentioned before, you would take a blow to the ego since everyone else would have what you have, the money issue is just another piece of the puzzle
Would i like to have these things, sure. Would i be spiteful if i did own them and this was successful, hell no.
Last edited:
*You're
Correct!
This discussion is meaningless. Before a lawsuit against the AG can be successful, you need a consequence to that office other than wagging your finger at him and saying;
